Adam The God

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

No, it doesn’t tell you how much or often a side scores.

You can move it as quickly as you want but if your final kick is constantly a turnover, you’ll never score.

You are overlaying your own assumption that faster ball movement is conducive to higher scores, but the stat itself doesn’t say anything about scoring.

No, I'm relaying the Fox Sports article on ball movement. "In general, the quicker you go, the more likely you are to score - every team scores more moving the ball quicker."

As I said in my previous post, it doesn't mean everything, but of 75% of the game is about ball movement now, and you've got Collingwood leading the league with slower ball movement and Brisbane winning the flag with the fastest ball movement last year, it doesn't say much else.

With regards to our own play, it can mean we're getting it in quickly, but not making the right decision going inside.

That's where expected score comes in and where we should have won more games if it weren't for poor accuracy.

14 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

It’s just speed. It says nothing at all about scoring, efficiency, winning, turning it over, anything. It is nothing but a measurement of speed.

Well, it does, the faster you move it, the faster you score. What it doesn't take care of is accuracy.

The idea that Kalani was ever playing anywhere but Melbourne was fanciful.

On 02/07/2025 at 10:55, Dr Don Duffy said:

There’s plenty of evidence about big injury breaks negatively impacting a player’s performance. Bowser last year is a case in point. Lever another one this year, but it is a recurring phenomenon with lots of other examples.

For that reason I’m not writing down the Kolt on the basis of form this year. Ditto Luker Kentfield for the same reason, and the FD obviously agrees, given the contract extension for him.

And agree with @rjay that this principle adds merit to Lindsay’s performance this season.

I don't like writing negatively about younger players. I think it's really harsh and not very sensible given most players take time to come on. Liable for egg on the face.

That said, the highlighted bit above is why I think inevitably in another down season for the club as a whole, we are seeing Kolt scrutinised.

Last year, the natural comparison to Kolt was Windsor, who had a terrific break out season. You could immediately tell Windsor would be a ten year wingman. We trusted his blue chipness so much that we moved him after one season into a really important half back role. Whether we should persist with that is for another post.

This year, Kolt is compared with Lindsay and Langford, two guys that pretty much from their first full games have shown elite traits. Their impact at times has been significant too.

This is why, fairly or unfairly, the spotlight is on Kolt.

I don't see any elite traits, but this has to be tempered by the injury interruptions and other factors.

28 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Id like to understand more about the ball movement measure. Of course we're going to be one of the quickest ball movement teams if we are just slamming the ball on the boot and kicking it as far forward as we can without trying to retain possession, hit up a target etc. It is related to our poor inside 50s, we just slam the ball on the boot and kick it on top of players heads or to packs. Perhaps we should be more considered with our ball movement and focus on retaining possession, kicking to teammates advantage and being in the best position to score goals instead of just moving it forward as quick as we can at all costs.

Being quick at ball movement doesn't mean we are a quick team, or even a good team.

Champion Data have said it's the most important stat in footy. So it definitely carries some importance.

But Daniel Hoyne has also said "there is no right or wrong, but it is all about the return that you are getting on the scoreboard from that method that you choose to implement".

So despite that, last year's premiers Brisbane were the fastest team in the comp last year.

Ball movement is about how quickly you move it from D50 to A50. So yes, it doesn't automatically mean goals but as this Fox Sports article notes (https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-2025-speed-of-ball-statistic-explained-every-team-ranked-from-fastest-to-slowest-afl-ball-movement-stats-champion-data-numbers-latest-news/news-story/8e4894d20931117b3a3311bf98ba3a51), "in general, the quicker you go, the more likely you are to score - every team scores more moving the ball quicker".

The important thing to note is "score" versus "kick goals". We don't have enough good finishers. Aside from Kozzy and Melksham, who can also be wildly inaccurate (see this season), we have too many mids and KPFs who cannot finish their work inside 50.

It's not a game style or ball moment problem, it's an accuracy problem. It's why Fritta's inaccuracy this year been super costly, because we don't have enough solid kicks inside.

As @Jaded No More wrote in another thread, if I were CEO, I'd be getting the best suited head of footy above Goody I could. That would be my first move.

That new head of footy has some huge decisions to make about list management, line coaches and even the senior coaching position.

I'd also be calling up Monash and trying to eek put an MOU vis a vis a Caulfield partnership with their sports science school.

9 hours ago, Howard_Grimes said:

I don't understand why you're quoting me regarding your first paragraph. I was simply pointing to where much of the conversation on here has strayed to over the past four years and that I disagree with a lot of it. Maybe let's leave it.

As far as your last paragraph goes, you're missing out again the most important factor in why we haven't been able to shift and why there are teething issues. It goes further than an 'ability or time to learn'. It's about execution. And again it comes back to our list. We simply don't possess enough attributes across the board to execute the type of game required to compete with the best sides. And as we've seen, if out contest and pressure isn't present against lower rung sides, we are also in trouble. That is entirely on Goodwin. Hasn't made the right calls or the calls he has made have been the same ones netting us the same result, the same predictable outcomes and the same types of losses.

How many more times are we going to hear that our inefficiency cost us a game? And how many more times from Goodwin are we going to hear that 'we're working incredibly hard on it and the results will come', all the while playing and trusting the same group of core players who are the reason behind it all?

How many times have we talked about execution. That's been the constant theme for 8 or 9 years. I and others wanted Viney to play as a pressure forward in 2020 because his ball use was a killer in midfield.

In 2021 I also lamented our goalkicking. I said if we didn't kick straight we wouldn't win the flag. We had an incredible finals series where we kicked mostly straight.

The way you're framing these things is like no one has ever said them. Our ability to execute has constantly been a Demonland trope for as long as I can remember...

Where's the facepalm reaction when you need it? What twaddle.

1 hour ago, Howard_Grimes said:

Mental fatigue was listed, it was never a centrepiece. You've stated that it's a centrepiece.

I used it as an example of a factor that isn't talked about nearly enough around here due to the conversation being consistently steered in the 'loading' or the 'we're not fit enough' direction by a select few popular posters.

Mental fatigue absolutely holds given our core group have barely changed and that's where most of your output as a side comes from. And that's part of the issue.

And I also disagree re Binman always stressing that it's a multitude of factors. Perhaps more recently he's come around due to our now consistent and predictable shortcomings. But early days the main conversation and excuses for our performances were around 'loading, injury, not being fit enough'. Not list imbalance, skill execution and level being MAJOR issues, inability to adapt being a major issue, the consistency and predictability of losing the same way being a major issue. Which of course leads to mental fatigue, lower motivation levels, loss of confidence etc etc.

Posters, myself included, talk about mental fatigue, but it's one of many factors, just as learning a new zonal system.

I noted on AFL360 while I was in the pub that we're the number ball movement team in the competition. It's a marked shift in the way we play.

IMV, not enough emphasis is placed on this shift in the way we're trying to play. This also explains teething issues, but I've outlined my position now on the rest of the season.

24 minutes ago, picket fence said:

We havent made the finals for two years and were inglorious in 22 and 23. On what basis (other than contract) should he be kept in 26??

We've reverted game style and as we saw with 2019-2020, it can take time to click.

Our zone last week was all over the place, for most of the game, which suggests we're having teething issuss with that. The wingers often get caught no man's land (ie Langford and Lindsay).

No doubt you'll disagree, Picket.

11 hours ago, Pennant St Dee said:

He is a fantastic coach, but old mate Swyl would have sacked him after the straight sets loss in 2014 and not even making finals in 2015.

We’re a very different beast to Geelong though. I’m undecided on Goodwin as it stands, my mind will be likely swayed by the way we finish the season.

Whatever the outcome not just changing the coach is needed, big decisions need to be made, Clarry is a constant distraction and whilst he’s been an absolute star a change IMO would be good for both parties and Fritsch also needs to go

And let's be honest, our admin and board is an utter shambles. But who stridently defends the guy that has overseen it all collapse in Brad Green? SWYL.

I find the idea that you'd sack Goodwin after '23 ludicrous too. No other club would do this. If Brisbane had done this with Fagan after three straight sets exits (one with a huge home ground advantage), he wouldn't be a premiership coach.

I'm in complete agreement that how we finish this season matters a lot to Goody's future. If we fall in a hole and win only 2 or 3 games, we need to look at change in 2026 irrespective of his remaining year. But if we see some further progress, he should coach out his contract, with finals the savour for him.

On 28/06/2025 at 22:57, Howard_Grimes said:

The theory that we had/have 'the most demanding' game style as being a reason for our poor performances is just another excuse pushed out to the front of the queue, masking the more pressing issues that have plagued us for a long time.

It's the same brigade that spruik the 'loading' talk.

And whilst I value Binman's thoughtfulness, articulation and deep-dive into all things stats, I think this place has turned into an echo-chamber of sorts thanks to some of the same excuses getting far too much airtime.

The idea and theory that we are not fit enough is just wild and flies in the face of the excuse of the last few years around not having our best players on the park. We've had arguably the best run with injury of all clubs this year, a much kinder draw and now the goal posts have been shifted by the same brigade toward 'mini rebuild/game-plan teething' issue.

Every year an excuse is thrown up and pushed to the front and it's a rinse and repeat situation with a handful of the same ones on rotation. All the while, the symptoms persist and issues remain.

Perhaps the idea of over-complicating some pretty straight forward corrections is just a more interesting pastime for some and is also a less painful lens to look through? That's how I see it.

Now having said all of this, it's not that I'm entirely counting out any influence that these 'rinse and repeat reasons' might have had along the way. They're wholeheartedly interlinked to the ACTUAL issues that plague us.

Take the idea/theory that we don't look 'fit enough' as an example.

And perhaps I can insert myself into this example as I've experienced it in real time myself during my footballing days to a high level I might add.

If you work your [censored] off all game both offensively and defensively, to create space, shut down space, support, become an option, be used as an option and your team mates more often than not butcher the ball around the ground but more importantly on transition/turnover and going inside 50, you are going to experience some pretty significant fatigue.

Now the fatigue won't just be physical if this trend continues, (which for Melb it does), the fatigue also becomes mental. It makes you question whether or not you should run to make that space if a particular player who is prone to turning the ball over may be flying through the middle only to kick with absolutely no care.

Now if you span this out over a season or even seasons, you can see how this fatigue can manifest in all sorts of ways.

But. The easy thing to say is, 'oh we're just not fit enough'.

No.

The same entirely goes with loading.

I would put far more emphasis on the idea of mental fatigue being the more significant factor game to game with us, in part because of what I outlined above. But not limited to. I'd also say match-day crowds at the G, personal life, motivation levels, belief in Goody, the system, each other. All of these factors I'd have ahead of loading. Yet they can't be measured so nobody wants to talk about them whereas the idea of loading can be used an excuse for a loss! Or at least contribute to the 'fatigue' posters see in a loss.

Also no.

Our issues are simply tied to our list and to the coach. Plain, simple, boring and some would say negative. List imbalance and a coach who has been too slow and too stubborn to move forward from what won us a flag.

Of course it's easier to look at 'outside factors' because it feels better and it makes for interesting hypothesising. But it's just that.

Some of this is fair, but your centrepiece of mental fatigue doesn't really hold given the amount of best 22 changes over the last 4 years. It's practically half the best 22, and it's the old players that are the ones butchering it and struggling to come to terms with the new way the team is trying to play.

It's more likely, as you imply, a multitude of factors at play, which @binman has always stressed.

Dangerfield is a marginally better kick (per DE), but the big difference between the two players is Trac's TOG is quite a bit higher.

In order to get more out of Trac, maybe we need to play him more in bursts like they do Dangerfield.

I'd be trading Clarry before Trac though...

Bergman is a good player, but fancy him earning more (potentially) than Kozzy. Chalk and cheese IMV.

22 minutes ago, jaydenh10 said:

worst thread i’ve seen on here, as i’ve mentioned recently he single handily saved this club

He was one of many parts that turned the ship.

I know it's been a bad 24 months but [censored] this thread is a shocker.

The Suns can't defend either. Fancy Melksham having 11 shots at goal. And most of them were from directly in front 15m out.

Trac is easily our worst kick, but Jefferson is uncompetitive.

Suns were good, but that quarter was a disgrace to the jumper.

On 20/06/2025 at 07:43, rjay said:

Josh was an important player in building the Premiership list.

It'd be a huge step down, but if Tim Lamb moves on, I'd be okay with Josh taking up the mantel again.

2 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

It was very much wokey virtue signalling by the MFC. There was no compulsion to do so.

Gambling can be a problem without doubt. It's also a personal decision.

As a business decision... it's dubious that we benefit.

If we still had PJ as a CEO or had had a competent CEO it wouldn't have mattered. Pert failed to capitalise on the bonanza of a flag. If the commercial team had held a fundraiser before the start of 2022, they'd have probably raised whatever we need for Caulfield...

You have to live your values a bit. As the club said at the time, gaming is not our core business, and whilst gaming was imperative in the past, we need to grow our football-related income. Pert had a golden opportunity to do that and sat on his hands.

We need to look at ways to grow the business and not also contribute to destroying lives through gaming. It's not woke, it's corporate responsibility.

10 minutes ago, MrFreeze said:

I'd say the Hawks also used a similar undersized key defensive structure last year. IMO they look worse with a clunky Barass and Sicily there now.

Im very keen to see AMW return as I feel he has similar traits to Hibberd, tough, super aggressive and fast.

IMO Salo has had a very good year, and our current game style feeds into his skill set. He was often criticized for not taking on aggressive kicks but we need to reliably chip the ball in our back half to rebound.

The Hawks have done the undersized thing at both ends.

I think Collingwood have shown the way in terms of undersized set ups at both ends of the ground. If you have speed of ball movement or are slinging back into a relatively empty 50, their pace by foot and handball game is certainly difficult to contain, despite having shorter players.

it doesn't mean we have to play this way mind you. Because we have shown we can contain the Collingwood game.

8 minutes ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

Collingwood run with Moore and Frampton and then have Howe as the third tall, who is a similar size to Howes but obviously has a big leap.

It can definitely be beneficial at ground level and playing the rebound game, but it means our mids need to put on a lot of pressure. If they don't Suns will take easy marks inside 50.

But it doesn't matter who you have defending, if the midfield pressure isn't on, any defensive unit will get scored on.

So I think it's a respectable gamble.

Collingwood have more run than us with Crisp, Maynard and Quaynor to our Bowey, McVee and Salem.

We'd be more comparable if Rivers stayed at half back, probably at the expense of Salem or ultimately Lever.

8 minutes ago, MrFreeze said:

Howes has taken the 3rd tall role TMAC played in 24 and early 25

Yep, that's fair, although TMac was a premiership forward, but I get you.

32 minutes ago, MrFreeze said:

Massive step up for Blake and Disco. Huge faith from the match committee to trust these two as our key defensive pillars, pushing out 2 premiership players is no small feat.

Out with the old, in with the new!

I am excited to see how they go.

Collingwood used an undersized defensive back 7 in 2022-2023, but it allowed them to be good at ground level and ping quickly off half back.

Salo is the next one in the gun I reckon. If he had a bit more speed, he'd be perfect back there. That said, his leadership and experience will probably be needed if Lever is on thin ice generally and May is edging towards the cliff.

With this last block of games, I hope they give the back 6-7 some continuity together. Likewise, we need to find a forward mix soon enough, instead chopping and changing. I think mostly because JVR has had such a poor year as a forward, it's thrown out our forward mix.

Blake has really good endurance, but he's also a nice, neat kick. Good luck again, Blake.